1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
181
182
183
184
185
186
187
188
189
190
191
192
193
194
195
196
197
198
199
200
201
202
203
204
205
206
207
208
209
210
211
212
213
214
215
216
217
218
219
220
221
222
223
224
225
226
227
228
229
230
231
232
233
234
235
236
237
238
239
240
241
242
243
244
245
246
247
248
249
250
251
252
253
254
255
256
257
258
259
260
261
262
263
264
265
266
267
268
269
270
271
272
273
274
275
276
277
278
279
280
281
282
283
284
285
286
287
288
289
290
291
292
293
294
295
296
297
298
299
300
301
302
303
304
305
306
307
308
309
310
311
312
313
314
315
316
317
318
319
320
321
322
323
324
325
326
327
328
329
330
331
332
333
334
335
336
337
338
339
340
341
342
343
344
345
346
347
348
349
350
351
352
353
354
355
356
357
358
359
360
361
362
363
364
365
366
367
368
369
370
371
372
373
374
375
376
377
378
379
380
381
382
383
384
385
386
387
388
389
390
391
392
393
394
395
396
397
398
399
400
401
402
403
404
405
406
407
408
409
410
411
412
413
414
415
416
417
418
419
420
421
422
423
424
425
426
427
428
429
430
431
432
433
434
435
436
437
438
439
440
441
442
443
444
445
446
447
448
449
450
451
452
453
454
455
456
457
458
459
460
461
462
463
464
465
466
467
468
469
470
471
472
473
474
475
476
477
478
479
480
481
482
483
484
485
486
487
488
489
490
491
492
493
494
495
496
497
498
499
500
501
502
503
504
505
506
507
508
509
510
511
512
513
514
515
516
517
518
519
520
521
522
523
524
525
526
527
528
529
530
531
532
533
534
535
536
537
538
539
540
541
542
543
544
545
546
547
548
549
550
551
552
553
554
555
556
557
558
559
560
561
562
563
564
565
566
567
568
569
570
571
572
573
574
575
576
577
578
579
580
581
582
583
584
585
586
587
588
589
590
591
592
593
594
595
596
597
598
599
600
601
602
603
604
605
606
607
608
609
610
611
612
613
614
615
616
617
618
619
620
621
622
623
624
625
626
627
628
629
630
631
632
633
634
635
636
637
638
639
640
641
642
643
644
645
646
647
648
649
650
651
652
653
654
655
656
657
658
659
660
661
662
663
664
665
666
667
668
669
670
671
672
673
674
675
676
677
678
679
680
681
682
683
684
685
686
687
688
689
690
691
692
693
694
695
696
697
698
699
700
701
702
703
704
705
706
707
708
709
710
711
712
713
714
715
716
717
718
719
720
721
722
723
724
725
726
727
728
729
730
731
732
733
734
735
736
737
738
739
740
741
742
743
744
745
746
747
748
749
750
751
752
753
754
755
756
757
758
759
760
761
762
763
764
765
766
767
768
769
770
771
772
773
774
775
776
777
778
779
780
781
782
783
784
785
786
787
788
789
790
791
792
793
794
795
796
797
798
799
800
801
802
803
804
805
806
807
808
809
810
811
812
813
814
815
816
817
818
819
820
821
822
823
824
|
\documentclass[11pt, a4paper, final]{amsart}
\setlength{\emergencystretch}{2em}
\usepackage[utf8]{inputenc}
\usepackage[backend=biber]{biblatex}
\addbibresource{licmalinka.bib}
\usepackage[T1]{fontenc}
\usepackage{mathtools}
\usepackage[activate={true,nocompatibility},final,tracking=true,kerning=true,spacing=true,stretch=10,shrink=10]{microtype}
\microtypecontext{spacing=nonfrench}
% \usepackage[utf8]{inputenc}
\usepackage{amsfonts}
\usepackage{amsmath}
\usepackage{amssymb}
\usepackage{amsthm}
\usepackage{XCharter}
\usepackage[charter, expert, greekuppercase=italicized, greekfamily=didot]{mathdesign}
\usepackage{mathtools}
\usepackage{enumitem}
\usepackage{tikz-cd}
\usepackage{tikz}
\usetikzlibrary{arrows,arrows.meta}
\tikzcdset{arrow style=tikz, diagrams={>=latex}}
\usepackage{etoolbox}
\usepackage{xcolor}
\definecolor{green}{RGB}{0,127,0}
\definecolor{redd}{RGB}{191,0,0}
\definecolor{red}{RGB}{105,89,205}
\usepackage[colorlinks=true]{hyperref}
\usepackage[notref, notcite]{showkeys}
\usepackage[cmtip,arrow]{xy}
\DeclareMathOperator{\Aut}{Aut}
\DeclareMathOperator{\Hom}{Hom}
\DeclareMathOperator{\Stab}{Stab}
\DeclareMathOperator{\st}{st}
\DeclareMathOperator{\Flim}{Flim}
\DeclareMathOperator{\Int}{{Int}}
\DeclareMathOperator{\rng}{{rng}}
\DeclareMathOperator{\dom}{{dom}}
\newcommand{\cupdot}{\mathbin{\mathaccent\cdot\cup}}
\newcommand{\cC}{\mathcal C}
\newcommand{\cV}{\mathcal{V}}
\newcommand{\cU}{\mathcal{U}}
\newcommand{\cG}{\mathcal{G}}
\newcommand{\cH}{\mathcal{H}}
\newcommand{\bN}{\mathbb N}
\newcommand{\bR}{\mathbb R}
\newcommand{\bZ}{\mathbb Z}
\newcommand{\bQ}{\mathbb Q}
\newcommand{\bK}{\mathcal K}
\newcommand{\FrAut}{\Pi}
\newcommand{\FrGr}{\Gamma}
\DeclareMathOperator{\im}{{Im}}
\DeclareMathOperator{\id}{{id}}
\DeclareMathOperator{\lin}{{Lin}}
\DeclareMathOperator{\Th}{{Th}}
\newtheorem{theorem}{Theorem}
\numberwithin{theorem}{section}
\newtheorem{lemma}[theorem]{Lemma}
\newtheorem{claim}[theorem]{Claim}
\newtheorem{fact}[theorem]{Fact}
\newtheorem{proposition}[theorem]{Proposition}
\newtheorem{conjecture}[theorem]{Conjecture}
\newtheorem{axiom}[theorem]{Axiom}
\newtheorem{question}[theorem]{Question}
\newtheorem{corollary}[theorem]{Corollary}
\newtheorem*{theorem2}{Theorem}
\newtheorem*{claim2}{Claim}
\newtheorem*{corollary2}{Corollary}
\newtheorem*{question2}{Question}
\newtheorem*{conjecture2}{Conjecture}
\newtheorem{clm}{Claim} \newtheorem*{clm*}{Claim}
\theoremstyle{definition}
\newtheorem{definition}[theorem]{Definition}
\newtheorem*{definition2}{Definition}
\newtheorem{example}[theorem]{Example}
\theoremstyle{remark}
\newtheorem{remark}[theorem]{Remark}
\newtheorem*{remark2}{Remark}
\AtEndEnvironment{proof}{\setcounter{clm}{0}}
\newenvironment{clmproof}[1][\proofname]{\proof[#1]\renewcommand{\qedsymbol}{$\square$(claim)}}{\endproof}
\newcommand{\xqed}[1]{% \leavevmode\unskip\penalty9999 \hbox{}\nobreak\hfill
\quad\hbox{\ensuremath{#1}}}
\title{Tytuł}
\author{Franciszek Malinka}
\begin{document}
\begin{abstract}
Abstract
\end{abstract}
\section{Introduction}
\section{Preliminaries}
\subsection{Descriptive set theory}
\begin{definition}
Suppose $X$ is a topological space and $A\subseteq X$.
We say that $A$ is \emph{meagre} in $X$ if $A = \bigcup_{n\in\bN}A_n$,
where $A_n$ are nowhere dense subsets of $X$ (i.e. $\Int(\bar{A_n})
= \emptyset$).
\end{definition}
\begin{definition}
We say that $A$ is \emph{comeagre} in $X$ if it is
a complement of a meagre set. Equivalently, a set is comeagre if and only if it
contains a countable intersection of open dense sets.
\end{definition}
% \begin{example}
Every countable set is meagre in any $T_1$ space, so, for example, $\bQ$
is meagre in $\bR$ (though being dense), which means that the set of
irrationals is comeagre. Another example is...
% \end{example}
\begin{definition}
We say that a topological space $X$ is a \emph{Baire space} if every
comeagre subset of $X$ is dense in $X$ (equivalently, every meagre set has
empty interior).
\end{definition}
\begin{definition}
Suppose $X$ is a Baire space. We say that a property $P$ \emph{holds
generically} for a point in $x\in X$ if $\{x\in X\mid P\textrm{ holds for
}x\}$ is comeagre in $X$.
\end{definition}
\begin{definition} Let $X$ be a nonempty topological space and let
$A\subseteq X$. The \emph{Banach-Mazur game of $A$}, denoted as
$G^{\star\star}(A)$ is defined as follows: Players $I$ and
$\textit{II}$ take turns in playing nonempty open sets $U_0, V_0,
U_1, V_1,\ldots$ such that $U_0 \supseteq V_0 \supseteq U_1 \supseteq
V_1 \supseteq\ldots$. We say that player $\textit{II}$ wins the game if
$\bigcap_{n}V_n \subseteq A$.
\end{definition}
There is an important theorem on the Banach-Mazur game: $A$ is comeagre
if and only if $\textit{II}$ can always choose sets $V_0, V_1, \ldots$ such that
it wins. Before we prove it we need to define notions necessary to
formalise and prove the theorem.
\begin{definition}
$T$ is \emph{the tree of all legal positions} in the Banach-Mazur game
$G^{\star\star}(A)$ when $T$ consists of all finite sequences $(W_0,
W_1,\ldots, W_n)$, where $W_i$ are nonempty open sets such that
$W_0\supseteq W_1\supseteq\ldots\supseteq W_n$. In another words, $T$ is
a pruned tree on $\{W\subseteq X\mid W \textrm{is open nonempty}\}$.
\end{definition}
\begin{definition}
We say that $\sigma$ is \emph{a pruned subtree} of the tree of all legal
positions $T$ if $\sigma\subseteq T$ and for any $(W_0, W_1, \ldots,
W_n)\in\sigma, n\ge 0$ there is a $W$ such that $(W_0, W_1,\ldots, W_n,
W)\in\sigma$ (it simply means that there's no finite branch in~$\sigma$).
\end{definition}
\begin{definition}
Let $\sigma$ be a pruned subtree of the tree of all legal positions $T$. By
$[\sigma]$ we denote \emph{the set of all infinite branches of $\sigma$},
i.e. infinite sequences $(W_0, W_1, \ldots)$ such that $(W_0, W_1, \ldots
W_n)\in \sigma$ for any $n\in \bN$.
\end{definition}
\begin{definition}
A \emph{strategy} for $\textit{II}$ in
$G^{\star\star}(A)$ is a pruned subtree $\sigma\subseteq T$ such that
\begin{enumerate}[label=(\roman*)]
\item $\sigma$ is nonempty,
\item if $(U_0, V_0, \ldots, U_n, V_n)\in\sigma$, then for all open
nonempty $U_{n+1}\subseteq V_n$, $(U_0, V_0, \ldots, U_n, V_n,
U_{n+1})\in\sigma$,
\item if $(U_0, V_0, \ldots, U_{n})\in\sigma$, then for a unique $V_n$,
$(U_0, V_0, \ldots, U_{n}, V_n)\in\sigma$.
\end{enumerate}
\end{definition}
Intuitively, a strategy $\sigma$ works as follows: $I$ starts playing
$U_0$ as any open subset of $X$, then $\textit{II}$ plays unique (by
(iii)) $V_0$ such that $(U_0, V_0)\in\sigma$. Then $I$ responds by
playing any $U_1\subseteq V_0$ and $\textit{II}$ plays unique $V_1$
such that $(U_0, V_0, U_1, V_1)\in\sigma$, etc.
\begin{definition}
A strategy $\sigma$ is a \emph{winning strategy for $\textit{II}$} if for
any game $(U_0, V_0\ldots)\in [\sigma]$ player $\textit{II}$ wins, i.e.
$\bigcap_{n}V_n \subseteq A$.
\end{definition}
Now we can state the key theorem.
\begin{theorem}[Banach-Mazur, Oxtoby]
\label{theorem:banach_mazur_thm}
Let $X$ be a nonempty topological space and let $A\subseteq X$. Then A is
comeagre $\Leftrightarrow$ $\textit{II}$ has a winning strategy in
$G^{\star\star}(A)$.
\end{theorem}
In order to prove it we add an auxiliary definition and lemma.
\begin{definition}
Let $S\subseteq\sigma$ be a pruned subtree of tree of all legal positions
$T$ and let $p=(U_0, V_0,\ldots, V_n)\in S$. We say that S is
\emph{comprehensive for p} if the family $\cV_p = \{V_{n+1}\mid (U_0,
V_0,\ldots, V_n, U_{n+1}, V_{n+1})\in S\}$ (it may be that $n=-1$, which
means $p=\emptyset$) is pairwise disjoint and $\bigcup\cV_p$ is dense in
$V_n$ (where we think that $V_{-1} = X$).
We say that $S$ is \emph{comprehensive} if it is comprehensive for
each $p=(U_0, V_0,\ldots, V_n)\in S$.
\end{definition}
\begin{fact}
If $\sigma$ is a winning strategy for $\mathit{II}$ then
there exists a nonempty comprehensive $S\subseteq\sigma$.
\end{fact}
\begin{proof}
We construct $S$ recursively as follows:
\begin{enumerate}
\item $\emptyset\in S$,
\item if $(U_0, V_0, \ldots, U_n)\in S$, then $(U_0, V_0, \ldots, U_n,
V_n)\in S$ for the unique $V_n$ given by the strategy $\sigma$,
\item let $p = (U_0, V_0, \ldots, V_n)\in S$. For a possible player $I$'s
move $U_{n+1}\subseteq V_n$ let $U^\star_{n+1}$ be the unique set
player $\mathit{II}$ would respond with by $\sigma$. Now, by Zorn's
Lemma, let $\cU_p$ be a maximal collection of nonempty open subsets
$U_{n+1}\subseteq V_n$ such that the set $\{U^\star_{n+1}\mid
U_{n+1}\in\cU_p\}$ is pairwise disjoint. Then put in $S$ all $(U_0,
V_0, \ldots, V_{n}, U_{n+1})$ such that $U_{n+1} \in \cU_p$. This way
$S$ is comprehensive for $p$: the family $\cV_p = \{V_{n+1}\mid (U_0,
V_0,\ldots, V_n, U_{n+1}, V_{n+1})\in S\}$ is exactly
$\{U^\star_{n+1}\mid U_{n+1}\in\cU_p\}$, which is pairwise disjoint and
$\bigcup\cV_p$ is obviously dense in $V_n$ by the maximality of $\cU_p$
-- if there was any open set $\tilde{U}_{n+1}\subseteq V_n$ disjoint
from $\bigcup\cV_p$, then $\tilde{U}^{\star}_{n+1}\subseteq
\tilde{U}_{n+1}$ would be also disjoint from $\bigcup\cV_p$, so the
family $\cU_p\cup\{\tilde{U}_{n+1}\}$ would violate the maximality of
$\cU_p$.
\qedhere
\end{enumerate}
\end{proof}
\begin{lemma}
\label{lemma:comprehensive_lemma}
Let $S$ be a nonempty comprehensive pruned subtree of a strategy $\sigma$.
Then:
\begin{enumerate}[label=(\roman*)]
\item For any open $V_n\subseteq X$ there is at most one $p=(U_0, V_0,
\ldots, U_n, V_n)\in S$.
\item Let $S_n = \{V_n\mid (U_0, V_0, \ldots, V_n)\in S\}$ for $n\in\bN$
(i.e. $S_n$ is a family of all possible choices player $\textit{II}$
can make in its $n$-th move according to $S$). Then $\bigcup S_n$ is
open and dense in $X$.
\item $S_n$ is a family of pairwise disjoint sets.
\end{enumerate}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
(i): Suppose that there are some $p = (U_0, V_0,\ldots,
U_n, V_n)$, $p'=(U'_0, V'_0, \ldots, U'_n, V'_n)$ such that $V_n
= V'_n$ and $p \neq p'$. Let $k$ be the smallest index such that those
sequences differ. We have two possibilities:
\begin{itemize}
\item $U_k = U'_k$ and $V_k\neq V'_k$ -- this cannot be true simply by
the fact that $S$ is a subset of a strategy (so $V_k$ is unique for
$U_k$). \item $U_k\neq U'_k$: by the comprehensiveness of $S$ we know
that for $q =(U_0, V_0, \ldots, U_{k-1}, V_{k-1})$ the set $\cV_q$ is
pairwise disjoint. Thus $V_k\cap V'_k=\emptyset$, because $V_k, V'_k\in
\cV_q$. But this leads to a contradiction -- $V_n$ cannot be a nonempty
subset of both $V_k, V'_k$.
\end{itemize}
(ii): The lemma is proved by induction on $n$. For $n=0$ it follows
trivially from the definition of comprehensiveness. Now suppose the
lemma is true for $n$. Then the set $\bigcup_{V_n\in
S_n}\bigcup\cV_{p_{V_n}}$ (where $p_{V_n}$ is given uniquely from
(i)) is dense and open in $X$ by the induction hypothesis. But
$\bigcup S_{n+1}$ is exactly this set, thus it is dense and open in
$X$.
(iii): We will prove it by induction on $n$. Once again, the case $n
= 0$ follows from the comprehensiveness of $S$. Now suppose that the
sets in $S_n$ are pairwise disjoint. Take some $x \in V_{n+1}\in
S_{n+1}$. Of course $\bigcup S_n \supseteq \bigcup S_{n+1}$, thus by
the inductive hypothesis $x\in V_{n}$ for the unique $V_n\in S_n$. It
must be that $V_{n+1}\in \cV_{p_{V_n}}$, because $V_n$ is the only
superset of $V_{n+1}$ in $S_n$. But $\cV_{p_{V_n}}$ is disjoint, so
there is no other $V'_{n+1}\in \cV_{p_{V_n}}$ suc h that $x\in
V'_{n+1}$. Moreover, there is no such set in
$S_{n+1}\setminus\cV_{p_{V_n}}$, because those sets are disjoint from
$V_{n}$. Hence there is no $V'_{n+1}\in S_{n+1}$ other than $V_n$
such that $x\in V'_{n+1}$. We've chosen $x$ and $V_{n+1}$ arbitrarily,
so $S_{n+1}$ is pairwise disjoint.
\end{proof}
Now we can move to the proof of the Banach-Mazur theorem.
\begin{proof}[Proof of theorem \ref{theorem:banach_mazur_thm}]
$\Rightarrow$: Let $(A_n)$ be a sequence of dense open sets with
$\bigcap_n A_n\subseteq A$. The simply $\textit{II}$ plays $V_n
= U_n\cap A_n$, which is nonempty by the denseness of $A_n$.
$\Leftarrow$: Suppose $\textit{II}$ has a winning strategy $\sigma$.
We will show that $A$ is comeagre. Take a comprehensive $S\subseteq
\sigma$. We claim that $\mathcal{S} = \bigcap_n\bigcup S_n \subseteq
A$. By the lemma~\ref{lemma:comprehensive_lemma}, (ii) sets $\bigcup
S_n$ are open and dense, thus $A$ must be comeagre. Now we prove the
claim towards contradiction.
Suppose there is $x\in \mathcal{S}\setminus A$. By the lemma
\ref{lemma:comprehensive_lemma}, (iii) for any $n$ there is unique
$x\in V_n\in S_n$. It follows that $p_{V_0}\subset
p_{V_1}\subset\ldots$. Now the game $(U_0, V_0, U_1, V_1,\ldots)
= \bigcup_n p_{V_n}\in [S]\subseteq [\sigma]$ is not winning for
player $\textit{II}$, which contradicts the assumption that $\sigma$ is
a winning strategy. \end{proof}
\begin{corollary}
\label{corollary:banach-mazur-basis}
If we add a constraint to the Banach-Mazur game such that players can only
choose basic open sets, then the theorem \ref{theorem:banach_mazur_thm}
still suffices.
\end{corollary}
\begin{proof}
If one adds the word \textit{basic} before each occurrence
of word \textit{open} in previous proofs and theorems then they all
will still be valid (except for $\Rightarrow$, but its an easy fix --
take $V_n$ a basic open subset of $U_n\cap A_n$).
\end{proof}
This corollary will be important in using the theorem in practice --
it's much easier to work with basic open sets rather than any open
sets.
\section{Fraïssé classes}
In this section we will take a closer look at classes of finitely
generated structures with some characteristic properties. More
specifically, we will describe a concept developed by a French
mathematician Roland Fraïssé called Fraïssé limit.
\subsection{Definitions}
\begin{definition}
Let $L$ be a signature and $M$ be an $L$-structure. The \emph{age} of $M$ is
the class $\bK$ of all finitely generated structures that embeds into $M$.
The age of $M$ is also associated with class of all structures embeddable in
$M$ \emph{up to isomorphism}.
\end{definition}
\begin{definition}
We say that $M$ has \emph{countable age} when its age has countably many
isomorphism types of finitely generated structures.
\end{definition}
\begin{definition}
Let $\bK$ be a class of finitely generated structures. $\bK$ has
\emph{hereditary property (HP)} if for any $A\in\bK$, any finitely generated
substructure $B$ of $A$ it holds that $B\in\bK$.
\end{definition}
\begin{definition}
Let $\bK$ be a class of finitely generated structures. We say that $\bK$ has
\emph{joint embedding property (JEP)} if for any $A, B\in\bK$ there is a
structure $C\in\bK$ such that both $A$ and $B$ embed in $C$.
\end{definition}
Fraïssé has shown fundamental theories regarding age of a structure, one of
them being the following one:
\begin{fact}
\label{fact:age_is_hpjep}
Suppose $L$ is a signature and $\bK$ is a nonempty finite or countable set
of finitely generated $L$-structures. Then $\bK$ has the HP and JEP if
and only if $\bK$ is the age of some finite or countable structure.
\end{fact}
Beside the HP and JEP Fraïssé has distinguished one more property of the
class $\bK$, namely amalgamation property.
\begin{definition}
Let $\bK$ be a class of finitely generated $L$-structures. We say that $\bK$
has the \emph{amalgamation property (AP)} if for any $A, B, C\in\bK$ and
embeddings $f\colon A\to B, g\colon A\to C$ there exists $D\in\bK$ together
with embeddings $h\colon B\to D$ and $j\colon C\to D$ such that
$h\circ f = j\circ g$.
\begin{center}
\begin{tikzcd}
& D & \\
B \arrow[ur, dashed, "h"] & & C \arrow[ul, dashed, "j"'] \\
& A \arrow[ur, "g"'] \arrow[ul, "f"]
\end{tikzcd}
\end{center}
\end{definition}
\begin{definition}
Let $M$ be an $L$-structure. $M$ is \emph{ultrahomogeneous} if every
isomorphism between finitely generated substructures of $M$ extends to an
automorphism of $M$.
\end{definition}
Having those definitions we can provide the main Fraïssé theorem.
\begin{theorem}[Fraïssé theorem]
\label{theorem:fraisse_thm}
Let L be a countable language and let $\bK$ be a nonempty countable set of
finitely generated $L$-structures which has HP, JEP and AP. Then $\bK$ is
the age of a countable, ultrahomogeneous $L$-structure $M$. Moreover, $M$ is
unique up to isomorphism. We say that $M$ is a \emph{Fraïssé limit} of $\bK$
and denote this by $M = \Flim(\bK)$.
\end{theorem}
This is a well known theorem. One can read a proof of this theorem in Wilfrid
Hodges' classical book \textit{Model Theory}~\cite{hodges_1993}. In the proof
of this theorem appears another, equally important \ref{lemma:weak_ultrahom}.
\begin{definition}
We say that an $L$-structure $M$ is \emph{weakly ultrahomogeneous} if for any
$A, B$ finitely generated substructures of $M$ such that $A\subseteq B$ and
an embedding $f\colon A\to M$ there is an embedding $g\colon B\to M$ which
extends $f$.
\begin{center}
\begin{tikzcd}
A \arrow[d, "\subseteq"'] \arrow[r, "f"] & D \\
B \arrow[ur, dashed, "g"']
\end{tikzcd}
\end{center}
\end{definition}
\begin{lemma}
\label{lemma:weak_ultrahom}
A countable structure is ultrahomogeneous if and only if it is weakly
ultrahomogeneous.
\end{lemma}
This lemma will play a major role in the later parts of the paper. Weak
ultrahomogeneity is an easier and more intuitive property and it will prove
useful when recursively constructing the generic automorphism of a Fraïssé
limit.
% \begin{fact} If $\bK$ is a uniformly locally finite Fraïssé class, then
% $\Flim(\bK)$ is $\aleph_0$-categorical and has quantifier elimination.
% \end{fact}
\subsection{Random graph}
In this section we'll take a closer look on a class of finite graphs, which
form a Fraïssé class.
\begin{proposition}
Let $\cG$ be the class of all finite graphs. $\cG$ is a Fraïssé class.
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
$\cG$ is of course countable (up to isomorphism) and has the HP
(graph substructure is also a graph). It has JEP: having two finite graphs
$G_1,G_2$ take their disjoint union $G_1\sqcup G_2$ as the extension of them
both. $\cG$ has the AP. Having graphs $A, B, C$, where $B$ and $C$ are
supergraphs of $A$, we can assume without loss of generality, that
$(B\setminus A) \cap (C\setminus A) = \emptyset$. Then
$A\sqcup (B\setminus A)\sqcup (C\setminus A)$ is the graph we're looking
for (with edges as in B and C and without any edges between the disjoint
parts).
\end{proof}
\begin{definition}
The \emph{random graph} is the Fraïssé limit of the class of finite graphs
$\cG$ denoted by $\FrGr = \Flim(\cG)$.
\end{definition}
The concept of the random graph emerges independently in many fields of
mathematics. For example, one can construct the graph by choosing at random
for each pair of vertices if they should be connected or not. It turns out
that the graph constructed this way is exactly the random graph we described
above.
The random graph $\FrGr$ has one particular property that is unique to the
random graph.
\begin{fact}[random graph property]
For each finite disjoint $X, Y\subseteq \FrGr$ there exists $v\in\FrGr$
such that $\forall u\in X (vEu)$ and $\forall u\in Y (\neg vEu)$.
\end{fact}
\begin{proof}
Take any finite disjoint $X, Y\subseteq\FrGr$. Let $G_{XY}$ be the
subgraph of $\FrGr$ induced by the $X\cup Y$. Let $H = G_{XY}\cup \{w\}$,
where $w$ is a new vertex that does not appear in $G_{XY}$. Also, $w$ is connected to
all vertices of $G_{XY}$ that come from $X$ and to none of those that come
from $Y$. This graph is of course finite, so it is embeddable in $\FrGr$.
Without loss of generality assume that this embedding is simply inclusion.
Let $f$ be the partial isomorphism from $X\sqcup Y$ to $H$, with $X$ and
$Y$ projected to the part of $H$ that come from $X$ and $Y$ respectively.
By the ultrahomogeneity of $\FrGr$ this isomorphism extends to an automorphism
$\sigma\in\Aut(\FrGr)$. Then $v = \sigma^{-1}(w)$ is the vertex we sought.
\end{proof}
\begin{fact}
If a countable graph $G$ has the random graph property, then it is
isomorphic to the random graph $\FrGr$.
\end{fact}
\begin{proof}
Enumerate vertices of both graphs: $\FrGr = \{a_1, a_2\ldots\}$ and $G
= \{b_1, b_2\ldots\}$.
We will construct a chain of partial isomorphisms $f_n\colon \FrGr\to G$
such that $\emptyset = f_0\subseteq f_1\subseteq f_2\subseteq\ldots$ and $a_n \in
\dom(f_n)$ and $b_n\in\rng(f_n)$.
Suppose we have $f_n$. We seek $b\in G$ such that $f_n\cup \{\langle
a_{n+1}, b\rangle\}$ is a partial isomorphism. Let $X = \{a\in\FrGr\mid
aE_{\FrGr} a_{n+1}\}\cap \dom{f_n}, Y = X^{c}\cap \dom{f_n}$, i.e. $X$ are
vertices of $\dom{f_n}$ that are connected with $a_{n+1}$ in $\FrGr$ and
$Y$ are those vertices that are not connected with $a_{n+1}$. Let $b$ be
a vertex of $G$ that is connected to all vertices of $f_n[X]$ and to none
$f_n[Y]$ (it exists by the random graph property). Then $f_n\cup \{\langle
a_{n+1}, b\rangle\}$ is a partial isomorphism. We find $a$ for the
$b_{n+1}$ in the similar manner, so that $f_{n+1} = f_n\cup \{\langle
a_{n+1}, b\rangle, \langle a, b_{n+1}\rangle\}$ is a partial isomorphism.
$f = \bigcup^{\infty}_{n=0}f_n$ is an isomorphism between $\FrGr$
and $G$. Take any $a, b\in \FrGr$. Then for some big enough $n$ we have
that $aE_{\FrGr}b\Leftrightarrow f_n(a)E_{G}f_n(b) \Leftrightarrow f(a)E_{G}f(b)$ .
\end{proof}
Using this fact one can show that the graph constructed in the probabilistic
manner is in fact isomorphic to the random graph $\FrGr$.
\begin{definition} We say that a Fraïssé class $\bK$ has \emph{weak
Hrushovski property} (\emph{WHP}) if for every $A\in \bK$ and an isomorphism
of substructures of $A$ $p\colon A\to A$, there is some $B\in \bK$ such
that $p$ can be extended to an automorphism of $B$, i.e.\ there is an
embedding $i\colon A\to B$ and a $\bar p\in \Aut(B)$ such that the following
diagram commutes:
\begin{center}
\begin{tikzcd}
B\ar[r,dashed,"\bar p"]&B\\
A\ar[u,dashed,"i"]\ar[r,"p"]&A\ar[u,dashed,"i"]
\end{tikzcd}
\end{center}
\end{definition}
\begin{proposition}
\label{proposition:finite-graphs-whp}
The class of finite graphs $\cG$ has the weak Hrushovski property.
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
It may be there some day, but it may not!
\end{proof}
\subsection{Graphs with automorphism}
The language and theory of unordered graphs is fairly simple. We extend the
language by one unary symbol $\sigma$ and interpret it as an arbitrary
automorphism on the graph structure. It turns out that the class of such
structures forms a Fraïssé class.
\begin{proposition}
Let $\cH$ be the class of all finite graphs with automorphism, i.e.
structures in the language $(E, \sigma)$ such that $E$ is a symmetric
relation and $\sigma$ is an automorphism on the structure. $\cH$ is
a Fraïssé class.
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
Countability and HP are obvious, JEP follows by the same argument as in
plain graphs. We need to show that the class has the amalgamation property.
Take any graphs $(A, \alpha), (B, \beta), (C,\gamma)$ such that $A$ embeds
into $B$ and $C$. Let $D$ be the amalgamation of $B$ and $C$ over $A$ as in
the proof for the plain graphs. We will define the automorphism
$\delta\in\Aut(D)$ so it extends $\beta$ and $\gamma$.
We let $\delta_{\upharpoonright X} = \id_X$ for $X\in \{A,
B\setminus A, C\setminus B\}$. Let's check the definition is correct. In
order to do that, we have to show that for any $u, v\in
D\quad(uE_Dv\leftrightarrow \delta(u)E_D\delta(v))$. We have two cases:
\begin{itemize}
\item $u, v\in X$, where $X$ is either $B$ or $C$. This case is trivial.
\item $u\in B\setminus A, v\in C\setminus A$. Then
$\delta(u)=\beta(u)\in B\setminus A$, similarly $\delta(v)=\gamma(v)\in
C\setminus A$. This follows from the fact, that $\beta\upharpoonright_A
= \alpha$, so for any $w\in A\quad\beta^{-1}(w)=\alpha^{-1}(w)\in A$,
similarly for $\FrGr$. Thus, from the construction of $D$, $\neg uE_Dv$
and $\neg \delta(u)E_D\delta(v)$.
\end{itemize}
\end{proof}
The proposition says that there is a Fraïssé for the class $\cH$ of finite
graphs with automorphisms. We shall call it $(\FrAut, \sigma)$. Not
surprisingly, $\FrAut$ is in fact a random graph.
\begin{proposition}
\label{proposition:graph-aut-is-normal}
The Fraïssé limit of $\cH$ interpreted as a plain graph is isomorphic to
the random graph $\FrGr$.
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
It is enough to show that $\FrAut = \Flim(\cH)$ has the random graph
property. Take any finite disjoint $X, Y\subseteq \FrAut$. Without the loss
of generality assume that $X\cup Y$ is invariant to $\sigma$, i.e.
$\sigma(v)\in X\cup Y$ for $v\in X\cup Y$. This assumption can be done
because there are no infinite orbits in $\sigma$, which in turn is due to
the fact that $\cH$ is the age of $\FrAut$.
Let $G_{XY}$ be the graph induced by $X\cup Y$. Take $H=G_{XY}\sqcup {v}$
as a supergraph of $G_{XY}$ with one new vertex $v$ connected to all
vertices of $X$ and to none of $Y$. By the proposition
\ref{proposition:finite-graphs-whp} we can extend $H$ together with its
partial isomorphism $\sigma\upharpoonright_{X\cup Y}$ to a graph $R$ with
automorphism $\tau$. Once again, without the loss of generality we can
assume that $R\subseteq\FrAut$, because $\cH$ is the age of $\FrAut$. But
$R\upharpoonright_{G_{XY}}$ together with $\tau\upharpoonright_{G_{XY}}$
are isomorphic to the $G_{XY}$ with $\sigma\upharpoonright_{G_{XY}}$.
Thus, by ultrahomogeneity of $\FrAut$ this isomorphism extends to an
automorphism $\theta$ of $(\FrAut, \sigma)$. Then $\theta(v)$ is the vertex
that is connected to all vertices of $X$ and none of $Y$, because
$\theta[R\upharpoonright_X] = X, \theta[R\upharpoonright_Y] = Y$.
\end{proof}
\section{Conjugacy classes in automorphism groups}
\subsection{Prototype: pure set}
In this section, $M=(M,=)$ is an infinite countable set (with no structure
beyond equality).
\begin{proposition}
If $f_1,f_2\in \Aut(M)$, then $f_1$ and $f_2$ are conjugate if and only
if for each $n\in \bN\cup \{\aleph_0\}$, $f_1$ and $f_2$ have the same
number of orbits of size $n$.
\end{proposition}
\begin{proposition} The conjugacy class of $f\in \Aut(M)$ is dense if
and only if... \end{proposition} \begin{proposition} If $f\in
\Aut(M)$ has an infinite orbit, then the conjugacy class of $f$ is
meagre.
\end{proposition}
% \begin{proposition}
% An automorphism $f$ of $M$ is generic if and only if...
% \end{proposition}
% \begin{proof}
% \end{proof}
\subsection{More general structures}
\begin{fact}
\label{fact:conjugacy}
Suppose $M$ is an arbitrary structure and $f_1,f_2\in \Aut(M)$.
Then $f_1$ and $f_2$ are conjugate if and only if $(M,f_1)\cong
(M,f_2)$ as structures with one additional unary relation that is
an automorphism.
\end{fact}
\begin{proof}
Suppose that $f_1 = g^{-1}f_2g$ for some $g\in \Aut(M)$.
Then $g$ is the automorphism we're looking for. On the other hand if
$g\colon (M, f_1)\to (M, f_2)$ is an isomorphism, then
$g\circ f_1 = f_2 \circ g$ which exactly means that $f_1, f_2$ conjugate.
\end{proof}
% \begin{proposition} Suppose $\cC$ is a Fraïssé class in a relational
% language with WHP. Then generically, for an $f\in \Aut(\Flim(\cC))$, all
% orbits of $f$ are finite. \end{proposition} \begin{proposition} Suppose
% $\cC$ is a Fraïssé class in an arbitrary countable language with WHP.
% Then generically, for an $f\in \Aut(\Flim(\cC))$ ... \end{proposition}
% \begin{proposition} Generically, the set of fixed points of $f\in
% \Aut(M)$ is isomorphic to $M$ (as a graph). \end{proposition}
\begin{theorem}
\label{theorem:generic_aut_graph}
Let $\FrGr$ be the Fraïssé limit of the class of all finite graphs $\bK$.
Then $\FrGr$ has a generic automorphism $\tau\in\Aut(\FrGr)$, i.e. the
conjugacy class of $\tau$ is comeagre in $G = \Aut(\FrGr)$.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
We will construct a strategy for the second player in the Banach-Mazur game
on the topological space $G$. This strategy will give us a subset
$A\subseteq G$ and as we will see, this will also be a subset of the
conjugacy class of $\tau$. By the Banach-Mazur theorem
\ref{theorem:banach_mazur_thm} this will prove that the class is comeagre.
Recall, $G$ has a basis consisting of open
sets $\{g\in G\mid g\upharpoonright_A = g_0\upharpoonright_A\}$ for some
finite set $A\subseteq \FrGr$ and some automorphism $g_0\in G$. In other
words, a basic open set is a set of all extensions of some finite partial
isomorphism $g_0$ of $\FrGr$. By $B_{g}\subseteq G$ we denote a basic
open subset given by a finite partial isomorphism $g$. From now on we will
consider only finite partial isomorphism $g$ such that $B_g$ is nonempty.
With the use of corollary \ref{corollary:banach-mazur-basis} we can consider
only games, where both players choose finite partial isomorphisms. Namely,
player \textit{I} picks functions $f_0, f_1,\ldots$ and player \textit{II}
chooses $g_0, g_1,\ldots$ such that
$f_0\subseteq g_0\subseteq f_1\subseteq g_1\subseteq\ldots$, which identify
the corresponding basic open subsets $B_{f_0}\supseteq B_{g_0}\supseteq\ldots$.
Our goal is to choose $g_i$ in such a manner that the resulting function
$g = \bigcap^{\infty}_{i=0}g_i$ will be an automorphism of the random graph
such that $(\FrGr, g) = \Flim{\cH}$, i.e. the Fraïssé limit of finite
graphs with automorphism. Precisely, $\bigcap^{\infty}_{i=0}B_{g_i} = \{g\}$.
By the Fraïssé theorem \ref{theorem:fraisse_thm}
it will follow that $(\FrGr, g)\cong (\FrAut, \sigma)$. By the
proposition \ref{proposition:graph-aut-is-normal} we can assume without
the loss of generality that $\FrAut = \FrGr$ as a plain graph. Hence,
by the fact \ref{fact:conjugacy}, $g$ and $\sigma$ conjugate in $G$.
Once again, by the Fraïssé theorem \ref{theorem:fraisse_thm} and the
\ref{lemma:weak_ultrahom} lemma constructing $g_i$'s in a way such that
age of $(\FrGr, g)$ is exactly $\cH$ and so that it is weakly ultrahomogeneous
will produce expected result. First, let us enumerate all pairs of finite
graphs with automorphism $\{\langle(A_n, \alpha_n), (B_n, \beta_n)\rangle\}_{n\in\bN}$
such that the first element of the pair embeds by inclusion in the second,
i.e. $(A_n, \alpha_n)\subseteq (B_n, \beta_n)$. Also, it may be that
$A_n$ is an empty graph. We enumerate the vertices of the random graph
$\FrGr = \{v_0, v_1, \ldots\}$.
Fix a bijection $\gamma\colon\bN\times\bN\to\bN$ such that for any
$n, m\in\bN$ we have $\gamma(n, m) \ge n$. This bijection naturally induces
a well ordering on $\bN\times\bN$. This will prove useful later, as the
main argument of the proof will be constructed as a bookkeeping argument.
Just for sake of fixing a technical problem, let $g_{-1} = \emptyset$ and
$X_{-1} = \emptyset$.
Suppose that player \textit{I} in the $n$-th move chooses a finite partial
isomorphism $f_n$. We will construct $g_n\supseteq f_n$ and a set $X_n\subseteq\bN^2$
such that following properties hold:
\begin{enumerate}[label=(\roman*)]
\item $g_n$ is an automorphism of the induced subgraph $\FrGr_n$,
\item $g_n(v_n)$ and $g_n^{-1}(v_n)$ are defined,
\item let
$\{\langle (A_{n,k}, \alpha_{n, k}), (B_{n,k}, \beta_{n,k}), f_{n, k}\rangle\}_{k\in\bN}$
be the enumeration of all pairs of finite graphs with automorphism such
that the first is a substructure of the second, i.e.
$(A_{n,k}, \alpha_{n,k})\subseteq (B_{n,k}, \beta_{n,k})$, and $f_{n,k}$
is an embedding of $(A_{n,k}, \alpha_{n,k})$ in the $\FrGr_{n-1}$ (which
is the graph induced by $g_{n-1}$). Let
$(i, j) = \min\{(\{0, 1, \ldots\} \times \bN) \setminus X_{n-1}\}$ (with the
order induced by $\gamma$). Then $X_n = X_{n-1}\cup\{(i,j)\}$ and
$(B_{n,k}, \beta_{n,k})$ embeds in $(\FrGr_n, g_n)$ so that this diagram
commutes:
\begin{center}
\begin{tikzcd}
(A_{i,j}, \alpha_{i,j}) \arrow[d, "\subseteq"'] \arrow[r, "f_{i,j}"] & (\FrGr_{n-1}, g_{n-1}) \arrow[d, "\subseteq"] \\
(B_{i,j}, \beta_{i,j}) \arrow[r, dashed, "\hat{f}_{i,j}"'] & (\FrGr_n, g_n)
\end{tikzcd}
\end{center}
\end{enumerate}
First item makes sure that no infinite orbit will not be present in $g$. The
second item together with the first one are necessary for $g$ to be an
automorphism of $\FrGr$. The third item is the one that gives weak
ultrahomogeneity. Now we will show that indeed such $g_n$ may be constructed.
First, we will suffice the (iii) item. Namely, we will construct $\FrGr'_n, g'_n$
such that $g_{n-1}\subseteq g'_n$ and $f_{i,j}$ extends to an embedding of
$(B_{i,j}, \beta_{i,j})$ to $(\FrGr'_n, g'_n)$. Without the loss of generality
we may assume that $f_{i,j}$ is an inclusion and that $A_{i,j} = B_{i,j}\cap\FrGr_{n-1}$.
Then let $\FrGr'_n = B_{i,j}\cup\FrGr_{n-1}$ and $g'_n = g_{n-1}\cup \beta_{i,j}$.
Then $(B_{i,j}, \beta_{i,j})$ simply embeds by inclusion in $(\FrGr'_n, g'_n)$,
i.e. this diagram commutes:
\begin{center}
\begin{tikzcd}
(A_{i,j}, \alpha_{i,j}) \arrow[d, "\subseteq"'] \arrow[r, "\subseteq"] & (\FrGr_{n-1}, g_{n-1}) \arrow[d, "\subseteq"] \\
(B_{i,j}, \beta_{i,j}) \arrow[r, dashed, "\subseteq"'] & (\FrGr'_n, g'_n)
\end{tikzcd}
\end{center}
The argument that those are actually embeddings is almost the same as in
proof of the amalgamation property of $\cH$.
It may be also assumed without the loss of generality that $\FrGr'_n\subseteq \FrGr$.
Of course by the recursive assumption $\FrGr_{n-1}\subseteq\FrGr$. The
$\FrGr'_n \setminus\FrGr_{n-1} = B_{i,j}\setminus A_{i,j}$ can be found in
$\FrGr$ by the random graph property -- we can find vertices of the remaining
part of $B_{i,j}$ each at a time so that all edges are correct.
Now, by the WHP of $\bK$ we can extend the graph $\FrGr'_n\cup\{v_n\}$ together
with its partial isomorphism $g'_n$ to a graph $\FrGr_n$ together with its
automorphism $g_n\supseteq g'_n$, where without the loss of generality we
may assume that $\FrGr_n\subseteq\FrGr$. This way we've constructed $g_n$
that has all desired properties.
Now we need to see that $g = \bigcap^{\infty}_{n=0}g_n$ is indeed an automorphism
of $\FrGr$ such that $(\FrGr, g)$ has the age $\cH$ and has weak ultrahomogeneity.
It is of course an automorphism of $\FrGr$ as it is defined for every $v\in\FrGr$
and is a sum of increasing chain of finite automorphisms.
Take any finite graph with automorphism $(B, \beta)$. Then, there are
$i, j$ such that $(B, \beta) = (B_{i, j}, \beta_{i,j})$ and $A_{i,j}=\emptyset$.
By the bookkeeping there was $n$ such that $(i, j) = \min\{\{0,1,\ldots\}\times\bN\setminus X_{n-1}\}$.
This means that $(B, \beta)$ embeds into $(\FrGr_n, g_n)$, hence it embeds
into $(\FrGr, g)$. With a similar argument we can see that $(\FrGr, g)$ is
weakly ultrahomogeneous.
By this we know that $g$ and $\sigma$ conjugate in $G$. As we stated in the
beginning of the proof, the set of possible outcomes of the game (i.e.
possible $g$'s we end up with) is comeagre in $G$, thus $\sigma^G$ is also
comeagre and $\sigma$ is a generic automorphism.
\end{proof}
\printbibliography
\end{document}
|